LIC ADO Recruitment Exam Syllabus Selection procedure With Solved Model Test Paper
FREE LIC JOB PREPARATION TEST WITH ANSWERS
PROCEDURE FOR SELECTION : Selection will be made on the basis of a written test and Interview
Written test: The Written Test will be of objective / Multiple Choice Questions MCQ type
There will be following two papers:
1. Test of Reasoning and Numerical Ability.
2. General [...]

SECTION- READING COMPREHENSION AND VERBAL ABILITY

DIRECTIONS for questions 1 to 5 .•

Each question consists of 21 sentence that has two blanks;
each blank indicates that something` has been omitted
Beneath each sentence is four sets of words, labeled (1)
through (4). Choose the set of words that when inserted in
the sentence, best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whale.

1. An essential purpose of the criminal justice system is
to enable purgation to take place; that is, to provide a
………,…., by which a community expresses its
collective …………. the transgression of the criminal.

5. lt is only to the vain that all is vanity; and all
…… . ……..,….. only to those who have never been
_ ……………,….. themselves.

(1) arrogance; proud of
(2) avarice; left to
(3) cowardice; afraid for
(4) deception; sincere with

Ans.4

DlRECTl0NS f0r questions 6 to 15:
ln each of the following questions, a related pair of
words is linked by a colon, followed byfour pair of words.
Choose the pair; which is most like the relationshqa expressed
in the original pair in capital letters.

DIRECTIONS for questions 28 tu 35: Read passage-I and
answer the questions given at the end af the passage. The
answers should be based either on the authors views or
inferences drawn j7•0m the given passage.
PASSAGE-I
George Bush has the dubious distinction of presiding over
the largest negative budget swing in American history; from
a surplus of$236 billion in 2000, the year he was elected, to a
deficit of $412 billion, or 3.6% of GDP, when he stood again in
2004.
Even in an economy with output of around $12 trillion,
$648 billion is a lot of money to misplace. Analysts were
aghast when the Bush administrations Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) projected that the fiscal year to September
2005 would bring bigger deficits still: $427 billion, according
to numbers released in February. The more cynical observers
suggested that the administration was simply releasing a
gargantuan number for the pleasure of later telling voters
that the budget deficit was closing faster than expected. In
support of their argument, figures released by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in March projected a
dcficitofonly $365 billion. R
When the OMB revised its numbers sharply downward
in July, to $333 billion, the doubting Thomas’s seemed to
have a good case. Now however, the CBO, which is generally
seen as more level headed, has followed suit. In its Budget
and Economic Outlook, released on Monday August l5th.
the CBO’s projections moved roughly into line with the
administrations forecasting a shortfall of $33l billion, or
roughly 2.7% of GDP. Republicans, unsurprisingly, rushed to
claim credit for the improvement. Tom Delay, the majority
leader of the House of the Representatives, said that the
brighter budget picture “should come as no surprise” to
anyone familiar with the Republican platform of cutting taxes
to spur economic growth. Many voters are also prepared to
give Mr. Bush the benefit ofthe doubt. The economy, alter
all, seems to be chugging along nicely. Real GDP grew at a
solid 3.4% inthe second quarter of 2005, an annual rate envied
by most European countries. Even America’s budget deficit
doesn’t look so bad when compared with the likes of Italy
and Germany.

Democrats, of course, pooh-pooed significantly,
Douglas l•loltz—Eakin, the CBO’s director, gave a warning that
the improvement, while welcome, seemed to be largely
temporary. The CBO’s report attributes most ofthe decrease
to an unexpected surge in corporate income tax receipts,
thanks to double-digit growth in corporate profits since the
end ofthe 2001 slowdown. But the boom in profits cannot be
sustained over the long term, especially since much ofthe
‘increase seems to stem from short-lived changes to the tax
code. Further out into the forecast period, the CBO says its
outlook is largely unchanged. The deficit will shrink slowly
until 2010, then drop sharply as•Mr. Bush’s tax cuts expire.
Federal debt will tick slightly upward, reaching almost 40% of
GDP by 2010, and then begin declining as the expiring tax
cuts push the budget towards balance. i
All ofthis is, ofcourse, more art than science. The CBO
itself notes that even if there are no legislative changes in
levels of taxation or spending, the vagaries of economic
forecasting mean that there is a 25% chance that the budget
will be in balance, or show a surplus, in 2010—and a 10%
chance that that year will see a budget deficit greater than
5.9% of GDP. And many of the assumptions that the CBO
makes, or is forced to make, seem rather far—fetched. lt assumes
that discretionary spending grows only at the rate of inflation,
for instance, even though in the recent years this category
has grown at multiples ofthe inflation rate:— lt is also required
to proceed as if all of Mr. Bush’s tax cuts were destined to
expire on schedule, when in fact there is considerable interest
in making them permanent.
But there’s one prediction it is making with a high degree
ofconfidence: Social Security and Medicare, America’s old-
age programmes, will eat up an increasing share of federal
spending and thus spell big trouble for the budget. The first
“baby boomers” will be eligible for early retirement in 2008.
The strain of caring for the swelling ranks of America’s aged
will begin to tell then, and it will get steadily worse throughout
the remainder ofthe forecast period, which ends in 2015. The
CBO thinks that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,
America’s health—care programme for the poor, will together
account for more than half of federal spending by 2015, The
CBO’s forecasting period does not stretch far enough to cover
the biggest shocks to come, lt is not until 2017 that Social
Security’s outflows will begin to exceed its inflows, forcing
the government to tap general tax revenues to pay benefits.
Excess Social Security contributions have been masking a
large portion of the budget deficit for years; without those
“off`—budget” surpluses, Bill Clinton would have struggled to
close the deficit in his last two years in office, an last two
year’s shortfall would have been well over half a trillion dollars.
Mr. Bush, of course, would argue that this is precisely
why the country needs his proposed (and floundering) reform
of Social Security. His opponents retort that it calls for a
thorough repeal of his changes to the tax code. With 2017
comfortably distant-sounding, neither seems particularly

likely. Instead, America’s government is bringing. back the
30-year bond, which it retired in 2001 when surpluses seemed
to stretch, out as far as the eye could see. As they run up the
national charge account, legislators. can at leas take comfort
that the latest round of downward revisions to forecasts
seems to cast further doubt on the “twin—deficit hypothesis”,
which argues that Mr, Bush’s spendthrift ways are driving
up the current—account deficit and putting the country in
danger of a catastrophic revaluation of the dollar. Trade
deficits have continued to soar even ai budget deficits have
come down, which tends to support a theory advanced by
Ben Bernanke the chairman of Mr. Bush’s Council of Economic
Advisers. He has suggested that a global savings glut is
flooding America with cheap money, and that the govemment
deficits may in large part have been mopping up surplus
capital that would otherwise have been borrowed by
America’s already debt—ridden consumers. But even Mr.
Bernanke has stressed that deficit—reduction should still be a
priority. “Not catastrophic” seems a poor guideline for fiscal
policy, government or personal, For now, however, it appears
to suit America’s politicians and consumers just fine.

28. According to the passage:

(1) Tom Delay was surprised by the improvement in
the American Economy
(2) Republicans did not claim credit for improvement
in the economy
(3) Many voters were prepared to give credit to Mr.
Bush for the improvement in the American
economy
(4) None ofthe above

Ans.3

29. Which ofthe following is not a true statement?

(1) Office of Management and Budget did not change
the budget projections
’(2) Congressional Budget Office revised the budget
numbers downwards
(3) Projections made by Congressional Budget Office
were similar to those of OMB
(4) None ofthe above

Ans.1

30. Which of the following is a correct statement?

(1) George Bush was the first American President ever
during whose tenure there was a deficit budget .
(2) American history never experienced budget deficit
till 2004.
(3) America had a surplu’s of $ 23 billion in 2000
because George Bush was elected President
(4) The largest negative growth in American budget
_ took place in 2004

Ans.4

31. Which ofthe following projected that budget deficit
will reach $ 427 billion?

(1) There is some possibility that the budget will be in
balance by 2010
(2) There is absolutely no possibiliqi that the budget
will be in balance by 2010
(3) There is 50% possibility that the budget will be in
balance by 2010
(4) lt is certain that the budget will show surplus by
2010

Ans.1

33. Mr. Bush is ofthe view that:

(1) USA needs urgent reforms of social security
(2) USA does not need any urgent reforms of social
security
(3) Bill Clinton was responsible for the sagging federal
resources
(4) None of the above

Ans.1

34. According to the passage:

(1) lt is not at all likely that social security and
Medicare will consume a great deai of federal
funds
(2) lt is certain that social security and Medicare will
consume a great deal of federal funds
• (3) There is some chance that social security and
Medicare will consume a great deal of federal
funds
(4) None of the above

Ans.2

35. Which of the following is not a true statement?

(1) By 2008 the aged population of USA will begin to
become a major burden on the budget
(2) By 2008 the burden of caring for the aged
population of USA will gradually decline By 2015
the burden of caring for the aged population of
USA will peak
(3) By 2015, social security, medicare and health-care
for the poor’ will account for a major part of federal
spending